Strongly oppose it from the left. It does some good things (and some other things I find very questionable), but a bill securing a public option would have been an infinitely better use of congress's time.

« Last Edit: July 26, 2010, 11:03:22 pm by Lafayette53 »

Logged

"Free speech is not to be regulated like diseased cattle and impure butter. The audience that hissed yesterday may applaud today, even for the same performance." - William O. Douglas

Since I'm not a leftist that lives in a fantasy-land and because I think that the bill does a lot of good things, I support it.

You're right, you don't live in any developed nation other than the U.S. (or as you call it, "fantasy-land"). I'm glad to hear you're not a "leftist", like the Tories, Aussie Liberals, Canadian Conservatives, CDU, etc etc. Those Che-tshirt wearing bra burning Trotskyite pinkos are so far out there...

Since I'm not a leftist that lives in a fantasy-land and because I think that the bill does a lot of good things, I support it.

You're right, you don't live in any developed nation other than the U.S. (or as you call it, "fantasy-land"). I'm glad to hear you're not a "leftist", like the Tories, Aussie Liberals, Canadian Conservatives, CDU, etc etc. Those Che-tshirt wearing bra burning Trotskyite pinkos are so far out there...

The idea that we could pass anything like single-payer in one go in this country is a fantasy. Now, the system that the Democrats did pass, puts us on the track to transition our healthcare system into something like Germany or the Netherland's, which would be a fine one. But it won't happen over-night or in a single bill.

I would love if our country was normal, like the rest of the Western developed world, where our Democratic party represented the center-right, we had some sort of sensible center-left social democrat/labor party, and the Republicans were a fringe party that got 10% of the vote if they're lucky. But we're not.

Who on earth would call this Health care bill 'massive', other than a right-wing propagandist, wormyguy? It only spends insignificant amounts of money on a problem which deserves about triple the resources.

First of all I don't think the federal government should be involved in health care. It should be a state or local issue. At the state or local level though I would support a "single payer" or whatever as long as it didn't include abortions.

Second of all it mandates the purchase of a corporate product. You cannot really get more corporatist than that.

So ultimately I oppose it both from the right and the left. I would have preferred the original house bill as at least it had a public option so it didn't mandate the purchase of a corporate product, but I still didn't support that one either.

I'd prefer a system of single payer for all children and young adults under 25, the elderly over 65, and the indigent and disabled.

The government option should then also be offered to the working poor with income and number of dependents determining out of pocket costs.

Working adults should get their health insurance on their own through a myriad of choices like health insurance cooperatives, non profit insurance organizations, and health saving accounts that are tax free for any amount spent on health care.

Logged

"Above and beyond the question of how to grow the economy there is a legitimate concern about how to grow the quality of our lives."-Paul Wellstone

"The message was that you are so well trained to believe what you see... That you believed what you saw."

Who on earth would call this Health care bill 'massive', other than a right-wing propagandist, wormyguy? It only spends insignificant amounts of money on a problem which deserves about triple the resources.

Well, considering that it spends more money per year than the entire GDP of Hungary, and it radically restructures the American healthcare system, I think that it's fair to call it "massive." I suppose that makes me a "right-wing propagandist."

Oppose, label me what you want. I actually don't have that firm of an idea of what I think we should do for healthcare, certain aspects of both Paul Ryan and Mike Gravel's voucher plans appeal but that's really all that comes to mind. Honestly the way things are now I think discussing healthcare reform is almost a moot point though, given the severity of our problems and the total inability for people to discuss any real comprehensive reform given the HMOS/AMA/AARP/etc...